Michael D. v. Commissioner of Correction
Citations
- 195 Conn. App. 6
Syllabus
The petitioner, who had been convicted of two counts of risk of injury to a child in connection with his alleged conduct in sexually abusing the minor victim on three separate occasions between 2001 and 2003, sought a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that he received ineffective assistance from the counsel who had represented him with respect to his criminal trial. Specifically, he claimed, inter alia, that his trial counsel had ren- dered ineffective assistance in failing to challenge the admission into evidence of a pornographic magazine in which young females were depicted in sexually suggestive settings and poses by ensuring that the trial court conduct an in camera review of the magazine. The habeas court rendered judgment denying the habeas petition, from which the petitioner, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court. Held: 1. The habeas court properly determined that trial counsel's conduct in attempting to preclude the magazine did not constitute deficient perfor- mance; the petitioner's trial counsel testified regarding the numerous steps they took in their attempt to preclude the admission of the maga- zine, including filing a motion in limine, presenting expert testimony, and making two requests on the record that the magazine be reviewed by the court, which stated that it would review the magazine's contents, and the habeas court found that trial counsel's failure to make an in camera request in writing, or to further press the court on whether it actually had reviewed the magazine, after counsel at least twice had made the specific request on the record that the court do so, did not constitute acts or omissions serious enough to establish that they were not functioning as the counsel guaranteed by the sixth amendment. 2. The petitioner could not prevail on his claim that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to request a jury instruction that the jury must unanimously agree on the factual basis for each guilty verdi
Judges: DiPentima; Bright; Lavery
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.